A comparison of the effects and usability of two exoskeletal robots with and without robotic actuation for upper extremity rehabilitation among patients with stroke: a single-blinded randomised controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Robotic rehabilitation of stroke survivors with upper extremity dysfunction may yield different outcomes depending on the robot type. Considering that excessive dependence on assistive force by robotic actuators may interfere with the patient's active learning and participation, we hypothesised that the use of an active-assistive robot with robotic actuators does not lead to a more meaningful difference with respect to upper extremity rehabilitation than the use of a passive robot without robotic actuators. Accordingly, we aimed to evaluate the differences in the clinical and kinematic outcomes between active-assistive and passive robotic rehabilitation among stroke survivors. METHODS: In this single-blinded randomised controlled pilot trial, we assigned 20 stroke survivors with upper extremity dysfunction (Medical Research Council scale score, 3 or 4) to the active-assistive robotic intervention (ACT) and passive robotic intervention (PSV) groups in a 1:1 ratio and administered 20 sessions of 30-min robotic intervention (5 days/week, 4 weeks). The primary (Wolf Motor Function Test [WMFT]-score and -time: measures activity), and secondary (Fugl-Meyer Assessment [FMA] and Stroke Impact Scale [SIS] scores: measure impairment and participation, respectively; kinematic outcomes) outcome measures were determined at baseline, after 2 and 4 weeks of the intervention, and 4 weeks after the end of the intervention. Furthermore, we evaluated the usability of the robots through interviews with patients, therapists, and physiatrists. RESULTS: In both the groups, the WMFT-score and -time improved over the course of the intervention. Time had a significant effect on the WMFT-score and -time, FMA-UE, FMA-prox, and SIS-strength; group × time interaction had a significant effect on SIS-function and SIS-social participation (all, p < 0.05). The PSV group showed better improvement in participation and smoothness than the ACT group. In contrast, the ACT group exhibited better improvement in mean speed. CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences between the two groups regarding the impairment and activity domains. However, the PSV robots were more beneficial than ACT robots regarding participation and smoothness. Considering the high cost and complexity of ACT robots, PSV robots might be more suitable for rehabilitation in stroke survivors capable of voluntary movement. Trial registration The trial was registered retrospectively on 14 March 2018 at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03465267).

Effects of virtual reality-based planar motion exercises on upper extremity function, range of motion, and health-related quality of life: a multicenter, single-blinded, randomized, controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR)-based rehabilitation is considered a beneficial therapeutic option for stroke rehabilitation. This pilot study assessed the clinical feasibility of a newly developed VR-based planar motion exercise apparatus (Rapael Smart Board™ [SB]; Neofect Inc., Yong-in, Korea) for the upper extremities as an intervention and assessment tool. METHODS: This single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial included 26 stroke survivors. Patients were randomized to the intervention group (SB group) or control (CON) group. During one session, patients in the SB group completed 30 min of intervention using the SB and an additional 30 min of standard occupational therapy; however, those in the CON group completed the same amount of conventional occupational therapy. The primary outcome was the change in the Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) score, and the secondary outcomes were changes in the Wolf motor function test (WMFT) score, active range of motion (AROM) of the proximal upper extremities, modified Barthel index (MBI), and Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) score. A within-group analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and a between-group analysis was performed using a repeated measures analysis of covariance. Additionally, correlations between SB assessment data and clinical scale scores were analyzed by repeated measures correlation. Assessments were performed three times (baseline, immediately after intervention, and 1 month after intervention). RESULTS: All functional outcome measures (FMA, WMFT, and MBI) showed significant improvements (p < 0.05) in the SB and CON groups. AROM showed greater improvements in the SB group, especially regarding shoulder abduction and internal rotation. There was a significant effect of time × group interactions for the SIS overall score (p = 0.038). Some parameters of the SB assessment, such as the explored area ratio, mean reaching distance, and smoothness, were significantly associated with clinical upper limb functional measurements with moderate correlation coefficients. CONCLUSIONS: The SB was available for improving upper limb function and health-related quality of life and useful for assessing upper limb ability in stroke survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with the clinical research information service (CRIS) ( KCT0003783 , registered 15 April 2019; retrospectively registered).

Efficiency and usability of a modified pegboard incorporating computerized technology for upper limb rehabilitation in patients with stroke.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, a pegboard has been commonly used as a useful training and assessment tool for patients with stroke. However, training using pegboards could be monotonous and may discourage motivation in patients with stroke, as it requires only repetitive movements without feedback. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to demonstrate the efficiency and usability of a novel rehabilitation instrument (Rapael Smart Pegboard; SP), which integrates computerized technology into a traditional pegboard. METHODS: This single-center study with a single-group pre-post design included 19 patients with hemiplegic stroke (11 outpatients and 8 inpatients). The patients received 20 SP training sessions (30 minutes per session, 5 days per week, over 4 weeks) according to their ability and status without any therapist intervention. The primary outcome was changes in the Fugl-Meyer assessment of upper extremity (FMA), and the secondary outcomes were changes in the Box and Block test and Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function test (JHFT). Additionally, usability assessment was performed. RESULTS: All outcome measurements except JHFT-gross score showed significant improvements with SP training. The significant improvements in these outcomes were consistently found in the outpatient group; however, the inpatient group failed to show improvement in the distal part of FMA, total JHFT score, and time. The usability test showed high satisfaction with 4.9 out of 5 points. CONCLUSIONS: The SP is an effective and feasible instrument for upper limb rehabilitation. Moreover, the SP can be used as a self-training tool without the assistance of a health care practitioner.

The feasibility of mixed reality-based upper extremity self-training for patients with stroke-A pilot study.

Mixed reality (MR), which combines virtual reality and tangible objects, can be used for repetitive training by patients with stroke, allowing them to be immersed in a virtual environment while maintaining their perception of the real world. We developed an MR-based rehabilitation board (MR-board) for the upper limb, particularly for hand rehabilitation, and aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of the MR-board as a self-training rehabilitation tool for the upper extremity in stroke patients. The MR-board contains five gamified programs that train upper-extremity movements by using the affected hand and six differently shaped objects. We conducted five 30-min training sessions in stroke patients using the MR-board. The sensor measured hand movement and reflected the objects to the monitor so that the patients could check the process and results during the intervention. The primary outcomes were changes in the Box and Block Test (BBT) score, and the secondary outcomes were changes in the Fugl-Meyer assessment and Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) scores. Evaluations were conducted before and after the intervention. In addition, a usability test was performed to assess the patient satisfaction with the device. Ten patients with hemiplegic stroke were included in the analysis. The BBT scores and shoulder strength in the WMFT were significantly improved (p < 0.05), and other outcomes were also improved after the intervention. In addition, the usability test showed high satisfaction (4.58 out of 5 points), and patients were willing to undergo further treatment sessions. No safety issues were observed. The MR-board is a feasible intervention device for improving upper limb function. Moreover, this instrument could be an effective self-training tool that provides training routines for stroke patients without the assistance of a healthcare practitioner. Trial registration: This study was registered with the Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS: KCT0004167).

Item-level psychometrics of the Ascertain Dementia Eight-Item Informant Questionnaire.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the item-level psychometrics of the Ascertain Dementia Eight-Item Informant Questionnaire (AD-8) by examining its dimensionality, rating scale integrity, item fit statistics, item difficulty hierarchy, item-person match, and precision. We used confirmatory factor analysis and the Rasch rating scale model for analyzing the data extracted from the proxy versions of the 2019 and 2020 National Health and Aging Trends Study, USA. A total of 403 participants were included in the analysis. The confirmatory factor analysis with a 1-factor model using the robust weighted least squares (WLSMV) estimator indicated a unidimensional measurement structure (χ2 = 41.015, df = 20, p = 0.004; root mean square error of approximation = 0.051; comparative fit index = 0.995; Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.993;). The findings indicated that the AD-8 has no misfitting items and no differential item functioning across sex and gender. The items were evenly distributed in the item difficulty rating (range: -2.30 to 0.98 logits). While there were floor effects, the AD-8 revealed good reliability (Rasch person reliability = 0.67, Cronbach's alpha = 0.89). The Rasch analysis reveals that the AD-8 has excellent psychometric properties that can be used as a screening assessment tool in clinical settings allowing clinicians to measure dementia both quickly and efficiently. To summarize, the AD-8 could be a useful primary screening tool to be used with additional diagnostic testing, if the patient is accompanied by a reliable informant.

Korean Version of the Stroke Rehabilitation Motivation Scale: Reliability and Validity Evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To translate the Stroke Rehabilitation Motivation Scale (SRMS), developed to evaluate the motivation level of stroke patients during rehabilitation, into the Korean language and to verify the reliability and validity of the Korean version of SRMS (K-SRMS). METHODS: The K-SRMS was developed following a structured process that included translation, verification, compromise assessment, reverse translation, feedback, and final correction. K-SRMS reliability was evaluated by performing internal consistency and test-retest analyses. The reliability test was conducted in 50 stroke patients. Its validity was assessed by comparing the K-SRMS with the scale and performing exploratory factor analysis. The validity test was conducted in 102 stroke patients. RESULTS: The test-retest analysis showed good reliability, and the internal consistency of the K-SRMS was similar to that of the original version for all, except 4, items. Thus, these 4 items were excluded, and then the validity test was conducted. Pearson correlation analysis demonstrated that the K-SRMS score was significantly correlated with the BAS total score (Pearson r=0.207, p<0.05). In the exploratory factor analysis, K-SRMS items were categorized into 7 groups (factors), and factors 1 and 4 showed mutual concordance with K-SRMS subscales, including intrinsic motivation factors and amotivation, respectively. CONCLUSION: The newly developed K-SRMS showed good reliability and validity. It could also be used as a tool to objectify the degree of motivation for rehabilitation among stroke patients in clinical care and research.